Wouldn't you rather it be the 'Real Racing Simulator'?

[Tenacious D]

No, it's just perfect as it is. Real Racing Simulator implies that there would be only hardcore racing machines, that need lots of skill to drive at the limits, and that wouldn't even guarantee success.

Well, you can say that about any racing game, if you bump the difficulty all the way up. In fact, that's even been true of Gran Turismo from the beginning. It's never been advertised as a game that you can grab any car, "and you're guaranteed to win every race." I sincerely doubt that any but a select few have been able to wipe the flooor with any racing game from the get go, be it Gran Turismo, GTR or Mario Kart.

Do you think the Drift Mode should be removed from GT5? Or do you share Kaz's idea that you keep adding concepts to Gran Turismo?

And Biggles, I don't think your idea is going to fly too far. For one thing, even if GT6 takes 4 to 5 years to produce, it seems that GT5 is so huge that it may take a couple of years or more to go through just the single player offline races. Online racing, race mod assuming we get it, and any DLC will keep it entertaining to the kids for years more. Talking about producing a GT with fewer cars than even Forza 1 would just cause a rebellion, because everyone knows that having a game with say 250 cars at sale and then offering an additional 1000 cars or more through DLC or Blu-Ray packs will just end up costing $150-300, or more, and I think the only people who would like that idea and take it seriously enough to do it are in Microsoft.

 

[ikral]

rFactor is one fun game, but it lacks personality. I played it today, ff is no way near to GTR, LFS, and offcourse GT5P.

 

[dancardesigner]

rFactor is one fun game, but it lacks personality. I played it today, ff is no way near to GTR, LFS, and offcourse GT5P.

I disagree completly, in GT5 you can't even feel the bumps in the road, The F1 feels far more realistic in Rfactor to me, it takes way more throttle and steering control to keep it on track with all aids off, the F1 in GT5 is easy. The FFB in GT5 feels dead in comparison. Any race sim site forums i'm sure will agree with me. It's almost impossible to oversteer the f2007 in GT5. The Topgear episode with Hammond in the Renault F1 shows how difficult driving a real F1 is.

 

[Sureboss]

If you use a wheel you can feel the bumps.

 

[dancardesigner]

If you use a wheel you can feel the bumps.

I do use G25, the overall FFB is very faint compared to Rfactor, but hey don't take my word for it, go try Rfactor and take the F1 for a spin. I know it sounds like i always bash GT, but the thing is i'm only being honest, it hurts me to admit some of the PC sims feel better in regards to physics, I love GT and want it to be the best in all areas, but the fact is from my experience PC sims are still ahead. GT is superb for a console with great graphics and a nice list of cars and tracks, but when it comes to realism i think GT will have a hard time competing, it has to find a balance between the Arcade racers and the sim fans, and also a lot of users use the controller, not a wheel. Think about it, how hard would it be to drive a real car in real life with a sixaxis?

 

[JohnBM01]

Maybe I meant "not enough character" in the mindset of actually having a serious emphasis on racing. A Career Mode or Season Mode (however you call it) would be my idea of I'm thinking too much of games like the ToCA Race Driver series and GTR games, where the focus is almost exclusively on racing and not on car collecting. Like when I play games like GTR or something, it's all about proper racing in proper racing machines, not so much street cars made for racing. I'm not knocking GT. But you know there are people willing to think of the GT series as child's play or not as serious a sim racer like most other highly-regarded games like GTR, Richard Burns Rally, or any titles like that.

So that's what I meant. It's not a pure racing sim, so Gran Turismo can not be conceived as a Real Racing Simulator.

 

[FoolKiller]

With that post all you have basically done is prove that you are just trying to disregard anything i say. Why have that dig about the Bird, and then make a statement about declining sales. To say the Firebird was not popular and an automotive ledgend is stupid.

I am not disregarding anything you say, but all that has been shown of the Firebird/Trans Am lines has been fourth generation, and those are not legends and had poor sales compared to their earlier generations. They definitely were not equal in popularity, in America, to Camaros and Mustangs. That generation is not still sitting in people's garages the way the earlier models are. If you wanted me to agree with you on them being popular and a legend you should have posted images/videos of any of the previous models, or even an image from Smokey and the Bandit, not images of the generation that got discontinued.

Legend-------------------------------------Not really

Fourth gen had fans, but it was not the same as it was in the past.

Now to answer the second bit. It is not so much that i think Kaz wants to put crap cars in and leave good ones out, but rather he puts in what he wants, not neccessarily what the public want. Most people don't want 50 variations of Skyline, they are all basically the same thing. Off course he can't obtain the licenses for some cars, or rather mostly manufacturers, but there are a lot of popular cars missing, whose manufacturer license has already being obtained.

And as has been stated multiple times, they also have to obtain the car to be modeled, and unless someone has inside info, none of us know the circumstances of each individual car. But as someone who makes similar calls in my job on occasion, I can bet that your reasoning of ignoring the customers is the least likely in every case. The only way I can believe that is if we consider his stated desire to have every car possible as also a lie. And that is hard to consider when we are looking at a possible 1,000 cars now.

I disagree completly, in GT5 you can't even feel the bumps in the road,

I can't give a comparative analysis to anything not on the PS3 because my PC struggles to run even discount rack games at this point, but I can feel bumps on my DFP in GT5, even on Daytona.

What are your wheel's FFB settings in GT5? I'm also curious what your physics and assists settings are.

I do agree that the F1 seems a bit too stuck to the track, but I am hoping that in the full GT5 with tire wear that our experience with cold tires will be similar to what Hamilton dealt with.

 

[jereweeti]

No, thank you.

The more they get closer to Top Gear (crazy challenges in crazy cars, testing them, and occasional racing) the better in my opinion.

 

[ikral]

In 1st lap on any race in GT5P i feel tires are cold, grip becomes good later on 2nd lap. And i dont think its my imagination, i feel that every time.

 

[Tenacious D]

^ I realized this as well, and anyone with a Logitech wheel controller should experience this too. I thought it was very odd that PD made no mention of tires warming up, and we had to post remarks about this ourselves.

 

[Grandi]

^ I realized this as well, and anyone with a Logitech wheel controller should experience this too. I thought it was very odd that PD made no mention of tires warming up, and we had to post remarks about this ourselves.

As with tires picking up grass and dirt.

 

[Kinetic]

its because it's those little things that make a big difference..

when there thrown in your face you don't appriciate them but when you notice them and your not told, the appreciation goes through the roof

 

[ikral]

And thats why we love this game!

 

[TrievelA7X]

Don't get me wrong - I'm not one of those douche bags that only raced Audi R8s in GT4 and everything had to have a stage 4 turbo kit. However, it remains a mystery to me why PD continue to waste space with 90HP boxes. A race full of Toyota Vitzes could conceivably be fun in real life, but in a game it's just going to be a boring, slow waste of time and (more importantly) disc space. I'm not saying get rid of cars like the Honda S500, and I know that slow doesn't always mean boring to drive, but I've never driven a Toyota Vitz/Mazda Demio etc. more than once or twice (excluding licenses/model specific races).

Just to clarify - I don't mean take out production cars, that's ludicrous. I mean take out cars such as the Vitz and Demio, and replace them with cars that (I think) are far more deserving.

I know everyone argues about what cars should be in, everyone has their favorite cars and all the rest of it, but all you need is to spend 5 minutes on racingsportscars.com to find 10 cars I'd bet good money you would rather have in GT5 than boring, uninspiring cars that were intended to get people that don't make a lot of money down the street to work.

Thoughts?

While I don't care for the -100hp cars, I would very much like to see my 99 Buick Regal, or something similar to it in GT5.
I'd rather they have less actual racecars, and more streetcars. But Driving a 64hp Suzuki around the Nurburgring is only enjoyable once or twice, yes.

 

[FoolKiller]

While I don't care for the -100hp cars, I would very much like to see my 99 Buick Regal, or something similar to it in GT5.

Reading this I realized just how awesome my old '85 Plymouth Horizon or my old '88 Buick Somerset would be. As I was young and dumb when I owned those I know precisely how they behave on the limit. In the case of the Horizon, I know just what it takes to flip it too.

 

[IsmokeGT]

Reading this I realized just how awesome my old '85 Plymouth Horizon .

That wouldnt by chance have been a turbo version, was it?

Found this video on youtube, Omni vs Z06
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LvHcxNJG7is&NR=1

 

[FoolKiller]

That wouldnt by chance have been a turbo version, was it?

Unfortunately no. It was this one (same color too), only a bit faded and missing the rear driver's side door handle.

Rest in peace Old Blue.

Found this video on youtube, Omni vs Z06
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LvHcxNJG7is&NR=1

I believe this right here shows some of the awesome things Gran Turismo's smaller cars have allowed people to do. At 18 years old I could never have afforded to pop a turbo into my Horizon and made it into a competitive racer. But if it were in Gran Turismo I could check it out and see what kind of insanity I could have attempted to pull off. In fact, I guarantee that I would have done that.

 

[kayman]

rFactor is one fun game, but it lacks personality. I played it today, ff is no way near to GTR, LFS, and offcourse GT5P.

But with rfactor the amount of modability is great.

You should try downloading the RealFeel or LeoFFB plugins for rfactor. It does take some fiddling around to get it just right, but at the end of the day you will get a top notch FFB feel.

 

[ikral]

Nah, i prefer PS3 over PC for gaming. And i do have F1 CE for PS3, where ff is very strong and does simulate bumps on the road. I even prefer GT4 over rFactor, but friend of mine who does not have PS2 or PS3 plays rFactor over steering wheel, so i play at his house from time to time. Also, my PC is a bit too weak. P4 3.0, 2gb ddr400, agp 256 mb...

 

[Rusty*]

Gran Turismo is and should always be: The real driving simulator.
Because that implies that GT is for all things driving, not just racing. Racing is only one type of driving.
I personally really enjoy going for a sedate cruise around the Nurburg in one of my favourite cars, getting to take in the sight and sounds. I think this is a also a great way to get to know a track very well and i personally think it can make you faster, when you do want to do a track attack.
PD has crafted GT into a prestigous automotive simulation masterpiece, that comprise's all things driving.
R*

 

[Biggles]

Just to illustrate how absurd it is to suppose you are going to be able to (or want to) drive all 1,000 cars in GT5, here are some basic numbers:

Supposing there are only 20 tracks in GT5 (seems unlikely). To drive each of those 1,000 cars for only one hour on each of those tracks would require 20,000 hours, or about 5 and a half hours a day, every day for ten years. That is without considering that some cars you will want to drive a lot more, in fact, you will have to in order to be anywhere near competitive online in them.

Of course, in reality, the vast majority of people won't drive anything like all the cars in GT5. Again, this is why I would prefer PD spend more time devoted to getting the core game out with full functionality, & leave hundreds of extra cars for DLC for the people who want them. If there are enough people who want to drive FoolKiller's '85 Plymouth Horizon () out there, fair enough, let them pay for the privilege, but don't hold up the game for everyone else!

I know everybody wants to get "the most" for their money when they buy GT5, but I'm convinced that sheer quantity of cars doesn't really represent the best use of PD's time & resources.

 

[Tenacious D]

I think that's a rather moot point now, Biggles. The work is done. But consider what this means.

For GT6, as far as cars are concerned, all Kazunori has to do is renew those licenses and go after cars everyone will want to drive, like a few classic models, news cars that were produced, and holdouts such as Porsche, if they don't get licensed for GT5. This shouldn't be a huge burden. Plus, the team can focus more attention on modeling more race courses. On top of that, refinements can be made in areas such as damage, weather, time of day changes and other environmental details.

Surely you aren't suggesting Kaz take cars away for GT6. That would cause a huge uproar, because those cars are modeled already. Besides, the 1000 car list gives everyone a range of cars they want to drive, as if dozens of car packs are included. You won't hear many people complaining, "Dang it, I want the AMC Gremlin, but I have to spend $15 on 49 cars I don't want!" as happened with Forza 2. Your argument is a decade late and a million dollars short.

And one more thing: we might be getting the equivalent of GT6 anyway. Kaz and the team have been polishing the GT5 engine for at least three years now, perhaps five, and refining the online structure. We're going to be getting a fantastic GT5 we probably wouldn't get if it had been produced two years ago. Yeah, an earlier GT5 would have been cool, something like a Prologue version of GT3, but Forza 2 was good for about 10 months, and Prologue and GT4 the rest. Heck, I'm still playing GT4. I'm well into my 7th year, and it would be more like 9 or 10 with all the arcade races I've been doing.

Turn 10 is following your model anyway, and so is Eutechnyx in a clumsier way, so we get the best of both worlds.

 

[Biggles]

Well I know it's pointless arguing with you & other GT fanboys (umm... I mean that in the nicest possible way ). The fact is SHIFT is coming out in a couple of weeks, if the physics & FFB are good, this may offer the "real racing simulator" & GT can settle into the role of providing a huge, encyclopedic selection of drivable cars.

 

[FoolKiller]

Of course, in reality, the vast majority of people won't drive anything like all the cars in GT5. Again, this is why I would prefer PD spend more time devoted to getting the core game out with full functionality, & leave hundreds of extra cars for DLC for the people who want them. If there are enough people who want to drive FoolKiller's '85 Plymouth Horizon () out there, fair enough, let them pay for the privilege, but don't hold up the game for everyone else!

You are once again assuming that something was sacrificed, without any evidence. It is quite possible that all features were planned in advance and they have achieved all their goals.

If you wish to complain about something in GT5 being held up you would have an easier time complaining about Tourist Trophy and GT PSP. At least with GT PSP Kazunori Yamauchi has said that there were times when the entire team was focused on it.

Never once has anyone but random Interwebers suggested that the car list has played a role in holding anything back. Kazunori Yamauchi comments more on technical limits than anything else.

 

[Tenacious D]

Well I know it's pointless arguing with you & other GT fanboys (umm... I mean that in the nicest possible way ).

Biggles, look. As a hypothetical, I can sort of agree with you. A little. But, ya know, GT5 is coming out. It's a little late to belabor your point. And for GT6, you realize that PD won't have to model a single car, and it may be the same way with tracks for all I know. They will anyway, if the world lasts much longer, and it won't take half a decade to model a few tracks and cars.

 

[Biggles]

You are once again assuming that something was sacrificed, without any evidence

I am assuming that, as it seems completely logical. Time has got to be a limited resource for PD. I would rather PD spent the time working on AI code, for instance, than adding your '85 Horizon Plymouth to the car list. I was just trying to point out that to actually spend any reasonable amount of time driving every one of the 1000 cars would take 1000s & 1000s of hours, & I really doubt many people would do this. On the other hand, everybody is going to be affected by crappy AI code.

Anyhoo, it is what it is, we'll wait and see...

 

[G.T.Ace]

I find racing the AI in GT5P a lot more interesting and appealing than the one in Ferrari Challenge for example. In Prologue, you can at least overtake cars without getting rammed.

Just saying.

 

[FoolKiller]

I am assuming that, as it seems completely logical. Time has got to be a limited resource for PD. I would rather PD spent the time working on AI code, for instance, than adding your '85 Horizon Plymouth to the car list.

But see, your assumption, if correct, means that PD knowingly put out AI that you find unsatisfactory. For all we know the AI behaves exactly as PD intended and the only reason why people have an issue with AI is because their definition of good AI is different from PD's. Since we have heard the same AI comments for multiple iterations I find that it is more logical to assume that no reduction in cars would have improved it.

Looking at the development time frames and the comments from PD regarding limiting features due to technical and contractual limits in the past I would even go so far as to guess that less cars would only result in an earlier release, not more features.

And when I consider the fact that individual jobs in development teams like these are specialized to specific parts of the game (look at the job titles in the credits), and that you couldn't easily just take a guy who specializes in modeling car parts all day and tell him to start programming an AI or even skid mark physics, and I think that this less cars = more features assumption is even more odd.

EDIT: Thinking on it even more. It may even be possible to assume that because they were working on getting a damage model and online that Kazunori Yamauchi was satisfied with that these car modelers were given time to work on more and more cars that they had modeling data available for, and the time spent on new features is why we have so many cars.

 

[C-ZETA]

I find racing the AI in GT5P a lot more interesting and appealing than the one in Ferrari Challenge for example.

Does that include the rubber banding of the GT5 AI?

 

[Tenacious D]

I haven't encountered rubberbanding in Prologue's A.I. cars. I have in Toca and Forza though.